Odin wrote: Does twit Ransom ever write anything worth reading? West Virginia voted for W twice and McCain once so some WV pols not being thrilled with Obama isn't the man-bites-dog news twitboy pretends it to be. The whining about Obama taking credit for killing bin Laden comes off as sour grapes, making the GOP appear even more infantile, if that's possible. - Obama bin Biden 2012

Dear Comrade Odin,

Apparently I do write stuff worth reading because you come back week after week.

You may not like what I write. But my advertisers don’t really care if you like it. A pageview is a pageview. And the fact that you stop to comment is very helpful, too.

And by the way, it’s not just WV pols who are walking away from Obama, it’s Democrat veteran pols like Bob Kerrey. That’s why I updated the article on Saturday.

The original article just had the West Virginia angle. But as I wrote in that first column: “Scores of Democrats running for reelection will defect from Obama before the campaign is done.”

That two very prominent liberals then defected from Obama in the same week is definitely worth reading and updating the article.

And Huffington didn’t just break a little with Obama. She called his ad “one of the most despicable things you can do."

Imagine Rush Limbaugh saying that about George W Bush in 2004.

As one reader pointed out to me on Facebook. Kerrey isn’t just a decorated veteran, he’s a Medal of Honor winner. He’s also a two-time Senator and former governor of Nebraska. His campaign for president in 1990 single-handedly put nationalized healthcare on the agenda for the Democrats. He’s got great bona-fides. If the Obama administration isn’t troubled by Kerrey and Arianna Huffington defecting on the bin Laden ad, then they are so delusional they are about to get their butts handed to them in November.

I probably should have included that Ted Kennedy was the insurgent. What I wrote though was that the insurgency came from “Hubert Humphrey progressives.”

We were both kind of a little right. But I should have been more clear.

BananaSplit38 wrote: So, Mr. Ransom dislikes President Obama. What's new? You are getting boring. Get some new material and tell us how YOU are going to resolve all of the problems of the nation instead of why you think someone else is not doing it. You must make a decent enough salary to think of something, so cut the crap talk and start coming up with some real ideas instead of your damn right wing propaganda. - Obama bin Biden 2012

Dear Comrade 38,

Newsflash: I am not running for president of the United States. Readers don’t really care what I would do to fix the problems of the nation. It would be highly presumptuous for me to have a “platform” when I’m not, you know, a candidate.

That said I do make suggestions from time to time.

Since you are like most liberals and you don’t like to undertake your own research, here some ideas that I’ve supported in the past:

1) Scrap the tax code. The tax code is the most corrupt document in the history of our Republic. The tax code, by statute, should be one page (8.5x11) long.

2) Term limits for Congress

3) All legislation should be limited to 100 pages.

4) All legislation should be limited to a single subject. We shouldn’t have unemployment benefits attached to a bill for dealing with military pay.

5) Open up oil development. We can generate about 10 million jobs in ten years along with $15 trillion in GDP just by developing domestic sources of oil.

6) Get rid of the Department of Education, shrink the EPA and Commerce Department, scrap the DHS, the Import-Export Bank, de-fund the UN and kick them out of the country.

7) Create a transparent Federal Reserve Bank, with a single mandate to ensure liquidity during bank panics.

That’s enough for one day. On the second day I would…

Kathy18 wrote: My daughter travels to West Virginia/Ohio border on construction business and she tells me how bad things are for the miners and towns in West Virginia. I believe her. - Obama bin Biden 2012

Dear Kathy,

You should believe her.

I spent a fair amount of time in 2010 as an activist in Virginia’s 9th Congressional District, which is on the border of West Virginia. To give you an idea how bad it’s become for liberals because of Obama’s war on coal, in 2010 Democrat Rep Rick Boucher, who was first elected to Congress in 1982 lost to Republican Morgan Griffith in what used to be a pretty safe seat for Boucher.

In 2008, he ran unopposed. In 2006, he got 68 percent of the vote. His lowest vote total since 1986 has been 59 percent.

Bush was elected president less than 12 years ago. Leave it to a liberal to “blame” Bush for 30 years of tax cuts when he was president for 8- starting 12 years ago.

You know how actors have stuntmen to fill in for the real dangerous work? Liberals should have stuntmen for economic arguments. Because it’s becoming increasingly apparent that anytime a liberal gets into an economic argument, he just hurts himself.

I really should start a list of comments from readers that prove that liberals should never be in charge of economics.

If that’s the case, where do corporations get capital to run and expand?

Pension funds control the largest amount of capital in the world, according to Investopedia, at about $10 trillion. They make up about 40 percent of all professionally managed capital. Behind those pension funds are the individual retirements of teachers and firefighters and cops and auto workers.

This is where all the liberal class-warfare nonsense falls apart.

The truth is that the only hope that the SEIUs and UAWs have for survival is if the stock market starts to perform more like their historical returns.

Even back in 2006, before the market crash, it was estimated that private pensions had a shortfall of at least half-a-trillion dollars, mostly because of over promises from pension fund managers- see unions. Since then the number has just mushroomed.

There really is no rich-versus-poor.

We are all in this boat together.

You better hope the rich do well. Otherwise, you and your union brethren are pretty much screwed.

Jim5522 wrote: Well John, guess Obama can't be as lucky as Romney is from all the enthusiastic support and endorsements he got from those he ran over in the primaries! I've only been following presidential campaigns since 1961 but I can never remember a more tepid response from a party to their presumed candidate. -The Best Reason to Vote Against Obama: Self-Defense

President Barack Obama won Tuesday’s Oklahoma Democrat primary but didn’t appear to sweep all 45 national convention delegates that were in play.

With 1,804 of the state’s 1,961 precincts reporting, Obama had 56.43 percent of the vote.

How does a sitting president get only 56.43 percent of the vote in a primary contest to “Who?” and “Huh?”

I’m not sure I’d spend my time shedding crocodile tears for Romney, if I were you.

In 2008 in the race to NOT be George Bush, Barack Obama just barely convinced everyone that between him and John McCain, he was the least like George Bush.

In 2012, the race in the general will be to see who is the least like Barack Obama.

Romney’s got that one sewed up.

BananaSplit38 wrote Correction!!! However disliked, Presidents of the United States are NOT "kicked out" of the White House!! They are voted out of office by the American electorate and have to leave the White House. The use of the words "kicked out" might describe some South American dictatorship but this is not a banana republic. Think of it like the Armed Forces where you can't stand some officer but you have to salute him anyway. You salute the rank, and not the man. I'm voting for Romney and when he is elected, Obama will leave the White House. Quit using terms that disrespect the Presidency even though you can't stand the President. Thanks. -The Best Reason to Vote Against Obama: Self-Defense

Dear Comrade 38,

I don’t have respect for any political office.

When I meet a Congressman, I call him by his first name; same with a Senator; same with the president.

Sorry, I think most politicians, but most especially Barack Obama, think that what they think of us is much more important than what we think of them.

I have more respect for anyone with a real job than any political office, including president of the United States.

If politicians want to have my respect, they are welcome to earn it. No more hiding behind the office and the presumed dignity of the office.

I think we should pass a law that changes the title of Mr. President to Mr. Dunce and Representative So-and-So to Jerkface So-and-So see how many people apply for the jobs then.

Mac287 wrote: I suppose anyone who is not out in your real world working qualifies as unwashed, anti-American, etc. etc, etc. You are dead wrong...lots of home owners who lost their jobs to patriotic American companies who moved to China are struggling to keep those homes. -Occupy Wall Street Operates on Mayan Calendar

Dear Comrade 287,

Spacebar, man. Spacebar.

Jobs going to other countries is a problem that has been going on for a long time. When I was young, the manufacturing jobs were going to Japan; now it’s Mexico and China.

Instead of trying to pass more complex laws that make it more difficult to set up businesses, the government ought to examine why the long-term trend has been to move jobs off-shore.

The most obvious reason is that labor costs are lower off-shore.

But it would be a mistake to believe that the U.S. can’t get around those issues. Businesses will give up a little bit in labor costs for the benefits of manufacturing in a FREE country that respects property rights. Companies will make investments in countries where corruption isn’t rampant and skilled workers who take pride in their work can be found. Companies would rather be in the U.S. than anywhere else. We just have to give them reasons to be.

Imagine being a CE of a company and having to recruit people to go work in Shenzhèn.

Do you think it would be easier to find skilled managers to live in Atlanta or Shenzhèn?

That’s why the U.S. must lower corporate taxes. I’d prefer zero corporate tax, but will settle right now for a competitive corporate tax.

Diane502 wrote: Most people have no clue that what the Mayan calendar foretells is that Venus will eclipse the Sun on June 6, 2012, which is the beginning of the end of government as we know it. The last time this eclipse happened was 243 years ago. People moved from the age of energy into the age of matter. Cultures were brutally killed off. Governments were destroyed. The people took control of their destiny during the Revolutionary War here in our nation. We can expect a replay of those years, but of a higher ingenuity. Let's watch the show this summer as many leaders, worldwide, will disappear from the scene. The USA will benefit from this eclipse, politically. Hold on for the wild ride.-Occupy Wall Street Operates on Mayan Calendar

Bernanrd83 wrote: John, I know the NFL Draft is entertaining but our country is on the brink of destruction. Most of the citizenry don't appear to know that. The current administration wants nothing more than for the population's attention to be diverted from reality and you come along with this offering. - 2012 NFL Draft Recap

Dear Jerkface So-and-So,

It was either put up a gratuitous NFL Draft post, or nothing. I picked the gratuitous NFL Draft post.

I really don’t write seven days a week. You might notice that I take days off from time to time. I still like to publish something though.

But actually the post has another benefit, besides giving me a day off from writing 900 words.

One of the things that I do a little differently than other columnists is that you get a chance to know me. You know I’m a real person, with hobbies and interests, etc.

I’m not just some guy you see on Fox News. And that’s not just because I’m not on Fox News.

It’s because I give you the little extra attention, like this column, or the NFL Draft column or the column I wrote on Geo. Washington. Don’t you feel better knowing who I am?

You have now demonstrated reason number 4 you should never but liberals in charge of anything economic.

Price is a function of demand, not expenses. Just because you lower expenses, doesn’t mean that that translates into lower prices. It could, but it could also mean that a company devotes more money to marketing or retains more profits to reinvest in the company.

Where do you think companies get more money to hire more workers? More profits.

You’ll never see a company where profits are falling desperate to hire workers. More jobs is a function of higher profitability.

They almost don’t stay in business. They came pretty close to bankruptcy in 2009.

They’ve been selling assets to fund cash flow, and doing what other capitalists do to stay afloat: lay off workers. GASP!

Here’s another shocker for you. The biggest problem for newspapers? Their pension plan. DOUBLE GASP!

Dow Jones Newswires- Pension funding requirements are hurting credit quality at three major U.S. newspaper companies, while consuming cash that could be used to invest in new opportunities or reduce debt, according to Moody's Investors Service.

Moody's said the companies--Gannett Co. (GCI), New York Times Co. (NYT) and McClatchy Co. (MNI)--have seen a four-fold jump in pension contributions in the past two years. Moody's estimates that pensions contributions consumed more than 20% of aggregate adjusted free cash flow at the three companies and the combined share is expected to increase to more than 30% this year and next year. By comparison, the amount directed toward pension plans was 7% in 2009, Moody's said.

Thirty percent of cash flow from the company is going to pensions?

That’s why the NYT imaginatively FROZE their pension plans and moved workers over to a 401k style plan where workers invest in the stock market. TRIPPLE GASP.

DoctorRoy wrote: That was my question a couple of weeks ago. The one Ransom claimed was the dumbest question in the history of the world. If they don't actually pay tax then are they using the so called high corporate tax rate as an excuse to move offshore. - New York Times Outs Apple, Enemy of the People, on Tax “Sidestep”

Dear Comrade Doctor,

Really?

I answered this once previously.

You have now demonstrated reason number 5 why you should never but liberals in charge of anything economic.

Corporations may pass along corporate taxes to customers, but that doesn’t mean that the tax has no effect on them.

When a corporation is saddled with high taxes, they raise the price of the products they sell, which means that they sell fewer products and they do so at a lower profit margin.

You own a company- and you make a product that for ease of demonstration has 100 percent profit- and you have a choice of: 1) Staying in the U.S. and charging customers $100 for a product while paying the 35 percent tax on corporate profits and netting $65 or; 2) moving off-shore and charging customers $90 and paying 20 percent corporate profit tax (the tax in Greece) and netting $72 or; charging customers $85 for the product and paying no corporate taxes and netting $85?

Questions for you: Who is really paying the tax and what do you do if you are the owner?

"Like" me on Facebook and you'll get sneak peaks of columns and, as an added bonus, I will never raise your taxes. Send me email and I just might mention you on Sunday.